Maximum point blank range and sighting in at particular distances...

[R.K.]

My suggestion? Practice at the farthest range you expect to hunt. You’ll figure out where the gun hits rather quickly. Put in the time and you’ll get there.

 

[brymoore]

@nastynate

You’re overthinking this situation.

MPBR is an easy solution to sighting in rifles. Sight the rifle in at 25 yards. Once dialed, move to 100 yards. The rifle should be 3”s high at 100 yards. If not, make the minor adjustments to be 3”. Don’t bother with minute issues of being 2.8” high. Put the ballistic information into your calculato, go forth and concur. If you use MPBR, you should be able to hold and shot to approximately 350 yards. You can dial after that yardage or farther as you see fit.

Army sights in its M4s in this manner too.

Great thing about MPBR, if you think your rifle is off in the field, shoot something at 25 yards to check your accuracy.

 

[3855WIN]

Not an answer to your question, but I’d try to find a round that is a little more accurate.

 

[nastynate]

Thanks for all comments. I didn’t adjust anything. Shot at 100, 200, and 300. My actual zero range is probably 220, based on where everything else is hitting. But I’m ready to go.

Groups are about 1MOA, btw. The gun is more accurate than I am, that’s for sure.

 

[Don Fischer]

I've never heard of doing MPBR at a specific range before. I do MPBR with a big game rifle at an 8" target. Usinf my 243, 25-06. one of my 6'5's or the 30-06 it works out real well. bullet never rises above 4" over line of sight ad shows the drop when the bullet goes 4" below. None of my rifles shoots to a dead hold to 300 yds But at 300 yds all will give me a good shot holding on the back line. Works out real well for me as L don't shoot beyond 300 yds anyway. You extend the range to zero and you change the path of the bullet. MPBR should be done at a particular size target. have a 243 I did it with a 3" target just for coyotes in high grass. Most times all I could see was a head!

 

[Wind Gypsy]

@nastynate

You’re overthinking this situation.

MPBR is an easy solution to sighting in rifles. Sight the rifle in at 25 yards. Once dialed, move to 100 yards. The rifle should be 3”s high at 100 yards. If not, make the minor adjustments to be 3”. Don’t bother with minute issues of being 2.8” high. Put the ballistic information into your calculato, go forth and concur. If you use MPBR, you should be able to hold and shot to approximately 350 yards. You can dial after that yardage or farther as you see fit.

Army sights in its M4s in this manner too.

Great thing about MPBR, if you think your rifle is off in the field, shoot something at 25 yards to check your accuracy.

I dont get why people would do this in this day an age. 165 copper in a tikka 30-06 is probably 2700 fps’ish. 3" high at 100 is probably in the neighborhood of 7" low at 350. Given that most hunters aren't going to be 3 moa shooters in field situations, further complicating that with 7" of POA error to start isn't a good situation not to mention 3" of error even at 100.

 

[MS 9x56]

I just do 300 yard zero. Zero first 3” high at 100 and then check at 300.

Can’t go wrong with the master Jack O’Connors method.

 

[Forkyfinder]

Can’t3 go wrong with the master Jack O’Connors method.

I mean it works - i guess.

But youre hunting adjacent to people that can spin a knob, use a rangefinder, and a modern ballistics calclator to be within a relatively small margin of error at those ranges and further.

 

[ignorethefringes]

I mean it works - i guess.

But youre hunting adjacent to people that can spin a knob, use a rangefinder, and a modern ballistics calclator to be within a relatively small margin of error at those ranges and further.

Yeah, but when that buck is walking away, nearly out of sight, you have a dip can in your hand, and a six pack in your gut, what method is faster? The old “hold a little high” or your fancy technology?


/sarcasm

 

[MS 9x56]

Myself I would rather be shooting than fiddling with calculators and knobs. But that’s just because I am old school and it has worked for me for 50 years so what do I know

 

[Wind Gypsy]

Can’t go wrong with the master Jack O’Connors method.

I recall hearing somewhere that an analysis was done based on hunts covered in his writings and he had an over 30% miss or wounding rate. Maybe his methods were the way in his time but its 2024 and common rangefinders make it obsolete.

 

[mtmuley]

I recall hearing somewhere that an analysis was done based on hunts covered in his writings and he had an over 30% miss or wounding rate.

You think most hunters today have a better percentage because of tech? mtmuley

 

[Forkyfinder]

You think most hunters today have a better percentage because of tech? mtmuley

30%?

Id hope so. Thats awful. Considering the bow wound % on the survey isnt that high i kind of doubt it.

 

[mtmuley]

30%?

Id hope so. Thats awful. Considering the bow wound % on the survey isnt that high i kind of doubt it.

That survey isn't indicative of what really happens in the rest of the hunting world. It is HT members only. And turrets and rangefinders don't automatically make a guy a sniper. mtmuley

 

[Rie Bread]

Even with modern range finders and dialers a mpbr zero still makes sense. I’m sure there’s a dope sheet for it.

Jacks 70% hit rate is probably most other hunters miss rate anyway so throwin shade like that is silly.

 

[mtmuley]

Even with modern range finders and dialers a mpbr zero still makes sense. I’m sure there’s a dope sheet for it.

Jacks 70% hit rate is probably most other hunters miss rate anyway so throwin shade like that is silly.

Things can go bad with spinning. Even if you have practiced it. mtmuley

 

[Wind Gypsy]

You think most hunters today have a better percentage because of tech? mtmuley

Do I think having an actual range of game animals and the bullet drop in inches or angular correction displayed alongside the range improves hunters odds of aiming/hitting in the right spot compared to just sighting in 3” high and guessing how far they are and thinking within 3” of POA is good enough (if their WAG on range is accurate)? Uh yeah.

Not going to pretend that the majority of hunters aren’t awful shots and unlikely to take the time to ensure the info for a ballistic solution on a rangefinder is perfect.. but it doesn’t take long to do it right and it IS a better option than what some writer guy did 60 years ago because the equipment wasn’t available.

 

[Wind Gypsy]

Even with modern range finders and dialers a mpbr zero still makes sense. I’m sure there’s a dope sheet for it.

Jacks 70% hit rate is probably most other hunters miss rate anyway so throwin shade like that is silly.

It’s not throwing shade, just pointing out that what “the master” accomplished without a rangefinder and good ballistic solutions is well below what a mildly competent rifleman should be able to accomplish now.

Most hunters suck at shooting and need all the help they can get.

 

[MS 9x56]

I recall hearing somewhere that an analysis was done based on hunts covered in his writings and he had an over 30% miss or wounding rate. Maybe his methods were the way in his time but its 2024 and common rangefinders make it obsolete.

I recall hearing somewhere is hardly fact. On the other hand in basic training close to 30% of new recruits needed assistance to qualify with an M-16.

 

[MS 9x56]

If you need gadgets then use them. I know what works for me. We are both happy. All I need is my rifle, ammo, and a sharp knife.